Tilak Ram Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 3620 Chatt

                                                                             Page 1 of 3

                                                                                 NAFR
               HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                   Order Sheet
                               CRR No. 931 of 2021


1.   Tilak Ram Sahu Aged About 25 Years R/o Vindhyawasini Ward, Vindhya
     Vihar Colony, Dhamtari, Police Station City Kotwali Dhamtari District
     Dhamtari (C.G.).
                                                                          ----Applicant
                                                                                (In Jail)
                                      Versus
2.   State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Dhamtari District
     Dhamtari (C.G.).
                                                                ---- Non-Applicant



10/12/2021         Mr. Kunal Das, Counsel for the applicant.

                   Ms. Deepti Shukla, P.L. for the State.

                   Heard on admission.

                   The revision is admitted for hearing.

                   Issue notice to the respondent on revision petition.

State Counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent.

Call for the records of both the Courts below.

Also, heard on I.A. No. 01/2021, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the applicant.

Challenge in this revision filed under Section 397/401 of Code of

Criminal Procedure to the judgment dated 24/11/2021 passed by Sessions Judge, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari (C.G.) in Criminal Appeal No. 57/2018, upholding the judgment dated 26/07/2018 of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari (C.G.) in Criminal Case No. 1513/2017 whereby the applicant has been convicted and sentenced as under:- :-

Conviction Sentence Under Sections 456 & 354 of R.I. for 1-1 year and fine of Rs. 500- Indian Penal Code (in short 500/-.

"IPC).

Counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned judgment is per se illegal and not based on proper appreciation of the evidence as required under the law. The applicant has been awarded the maximum sentence of 01 year and disposal of this revision petition is likely to take some time, therefore, the applicant may be released on bail.

On the other hand, State counsel opposes the bail application.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, short sentence of 1 year awarded to the applicant, the applicant has no criminal antecedents as stated by State Counsel, he is in jail and disposal of the revision is likely to take sometime, without expressing anything on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that present is a fit case to suspend the jail sentence imposed upon the applicant and to release him on bail.

Accordingly, the application (I.A. No. 01/2021) is allowed.

It is directed that the execution of substantive jail sentence imposed upon the applicant shall remain suspended during the pendency of this revision and he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each

to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court 28th February, 2022. He shall thereafter appear before the Trial Court on a date to be given by the Registry of this Court and then continue to appear there on all such subsequent dates as are given to him by the said Court, till disposal of this revision.

List this case for final hearing in its due course.

-Sd/-

(Gautam Chourdiya) Judge

Chandrakant